Replies

Trying to save the long-expired ERA is just another ploy by lawless, post-17th Amendment ratification Democrats, who exploit low-information women by unthinkingly promoting the murder of unborn Democrats for the “instant gratification” of winning the next election, to stay in power imo.

"The ERA would amend the U.S. Constitution to guarantee equal rights for all born [??? emphasis added] citizens no matter what their sex is."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

“Born citizens” deliberately wrongly ignores male and female unborn persons imo.

Note that there is nothing stopping any state from defining personhood as beginning at conception imo, strengthening 14th Amendment basic right-to-life protections for unborn persons by doing so imo.

”14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law [emphasis added]; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The bottom line is that we don’t need constitutional equality protections for sex beyond 19th Amendment voting rights protections imo.

"19th Amendment:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Corrections, insights welcome.

Remember in November!

MAGA! Now KAGA! (Keep America Great Always!)